You know what else was confusing about that presentation, why would I need to preorder a cell phone game? Fallout 76 and Blades ... that presentation left me even more confused. At least though were going to have fallout dragons in this one.

Born too late to explore the new world.Born too early to explore the universe.Born just in time to see liberty die.

Everything I've seen about this game has me thinking I'll skip it entirely. Online has zero interest for me (gaming is something I enjoy most as a single player experience; the traditional MMO was a bit of an exception for me, but I pass on those now as well). Combine that with no mod support at launch (mods being the only saving grace for Bethesda games, as both Skyrim and the Fallout games by them would be complete trash without mods, imo, and largely broken at that -- Skyrim was one of the buggiest games I've ever experienced prior to things like the Unofficial patch mods getting built up, with crashes and broken quests/NPCs, combat, skills, etc., etc.).

I'm honestly not that torn about it, though, after Fallout 4. Bethesda got dropped down to 'buy at 75% off sale' status, for me, after that game.

Nope, think about games like Rust. Online, open world, survival games. Built around PvP.

Servers don't matter -- you'd end up on the same shard as your group, and that's all that matters. You'd never need to pick one, people would just teleport to you.

But....private servers come in if you want to use mods. Change the ruleset, add in new things, etc. Now you need a private server running just your variant, so people know they're joining a modded game. That's a frill. An extra you add in later. Not core gameplay.

If you're running open world PvP, like Rust (or even GTA5 online) -- private servers are a frill, probably only even being considered because of the long history of modding Fallout. The fact that you can restrict it to just your friends (and thus avoid PvP) is an incidental use, and you can bet the game isn't constructed around no PvP.

It's pretty clear, by how they've danced around and refused to utter the words "Optional PvP" or "PvE only shards" or "PvP flags" or "PvE and PvP zones" or any other set of words that indicates there are major areas of the game where you can't be ganked randomly, that this game is built around PvP. Not optional PvP, PvP with no way to turn it off. It's literally the biggest complaint and question from the Fallout userbase, and it's the one they won't answer definitively six months before launch. They know the answer, clearly. Which means they don't think the fans will like the answer.

Then there's the charming naivety of some of their statements on PvP, which reminds me a lot of early Ultima Online. The lovely belief that "bounties" or that the "proper incentives" or my favorite "tweaking incentives in beta" could reign in griefers,

No human NPCs, no talk of story, an absolute refusal to talk about forced PvP, the repeated statements that PvP offer "Drama" and "tension"....

Yeah, open world PvP. Rush clone, or GTA5 online clone, whatever.

I'm sure there's a solid audience for it, but the fact that they won't commit to simple questions like "How much PvP are we talking here" is pretty telling that they don't think the users will like it.

Well it shouldn't be a surprise. It's being released too quickly to have had any more effort put into it than Fallout Shelter. The next real Fallout game will come some time after the next Elder Scrolls.

As a PvP and Rust lover, I am sure you are -unfortunately- wrong. When he says "of course you can play solo" there is NO way that can be twisted "you can play solo but with PvP" (what?). So I am willing to bet some money (a little) on the fact that even at launch it will be possible to opt out of PvP completely by playing on a "solo" or "friends only" instance. 100% as in Elite Dangerous.

If you're running open world PvP, like Rust (or even GTA5 online) -- private servers are a frill, probably only even being considered because of the long history of modding Fallout. The fact that you can restrict it to just your friends (and thus avoid PvP) is an incidental use, and you can bet the game isn't constructed around no PvP.

I have no problem with an F13 server having PvP. I have a problem with some rando 15 year old blowing up my shit while I'm working. Whether or not this game is worth playing hinges entirely on being able to avoid playing with random people.

As a PvP and Rust lover, I am sure you are -unfortunately- wrong. When he says "of course you can play solo" there is NO way that can be twisted "you can play solo but with PvP" (what?). So I am willing to bet some money (a little) on the fact that even at launch it will be possible to opt out of PvP completely by playing on a "solo" or "friends only" instance. 100% as in Elite Dangerous.

I would not bet that money, as they're actually on record stating that both mods and private servers are "a service they'd like to offer", specifically sometime "after launch".

And yes, it appears to be pretty much PvP anywhere outside the Vault.

And "solo" just means "not in a group", since they then said it something like "You can play solo, but there will be other players around you'll see and whatnot".

It's Rust: Fallout Edition, which seems an odd choice for a big E3 push. Certainly more money and development effort than Fallout Shelter into development, but it's not a huge overlap with their user base, which seems to want "co-op Fallout" if they want multiplayer at all. So...not sure why they're pushing it as a big thing when it seems very likely they're not going to get a lot of the big fans of their IP.

Rust, Ark, Elite Dangerous -- how well did they sell? (I'm genuinely curious, I have no idea how popular they are).

Rust and Ark made shitton of money. Elite Dangerous made much much less but still made a huge profit.

Also, "private servers" are a different thing the way I see it from "Let me run this instance with nobody around". Again, see Elite Dangerous.

What they mean with "private servers" is the ability for you or your friends to run your own server with your own timeline, ruleset and stuff like that. Eventually mods. What they mean (and I mean, and Elite Dangerous means) with "play solo" is: "you are on our servers, on our ruleset, on our timeline, but you can exclude other players from whatever unnamed instance you are in".

Look, here's the bottom line. The Elite Dangerous way (which I hate) worked VERY well for that game. It only makes sense that some company was going to copy it at some point.

PvP and player structures allows them to cover the fact that they probably haven't actually had time to create enough content to fill a map "4 times larger than fallout 4". The players will make their own content!

It has even less of what I liked about fallout than FO4 and is a easy pass. I have as much loyalty to a franchise as the big publishers do.

Rust, Ark, Elite Dangerous -- how well did they sell? (I'm genuinely curious, I have no idea how popular they are).

Elite: Dangerous is very popular and vast. For many players, it's the only game they play. Its population is like a successful MMO - people drift away, others remain long-term, the drifters come back for a while when new content is released, pattern repeats. It's in a lull at the moment before new content is released at the end of this month, but it's still busy.

You progress the same character in the same persistent world (affecting everyone) no matter how you log in: Solo (you'll only see NPCs), Private Group (NPCs and those invited), or Open Play (NPCs and anyone who wants). You can relog to any of those at the same time and continue on the same character.

I am a member of a large Private Group called Mobius that has thousands of players. It is strictly PvE-only. Break the rules and the (volunteer) moderators will ban you from Mobius.

Mostly I log into Solo, which is lonely but safe. Sometimes I log into Mobius, e.g. when there's an effort to run supplies to a specific space station, and I want to feel like I'm doing that in a fleet. Rarely I log into Open, which exposes my character to PvP but I see a lot more people. That said, the game models the entire 400 billion star systems of the Milky Way, so even in Open you'll rarely see other people unless you go to popular places. If you just go exploring in deep space in Open you don't see anyone. I doubt Fallout 76 will suffer from that problem.

Rust, Ark, Elite Dangerous -- how well did they sell? (I'm genuinely curious, I have no idea how popular they are).

It's only one datapoint but Conan Exiles saved Funcom from bankruptcy.

Also, if private servers are anything like in that game you'll be able to tweak most settings and password it so only those you want in can join.

"We live in a country, where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest, Yoko Ono was standing right next to him and not one fucking bullet! Explain that to me! Explain that to me, God! Explain it to me, God!" - Denis Leary summing up my feelings about the nature of the universe.

Well. Here's hoping they stop yammering about what they have no idea they are making and end up producing Fallout Exiles. That would be fun and amusing. A private, moldable, password protected Fallout game would be an amusing sandobx to play in with about 100 people.

"There is a technical term for someone who confuses the opinions of a character in a book with those of the author. That term is idiot." -SMStirling

It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

I fear it'll end up as -Fallout 4 engine -patched in questionable multiplayer when it comes to code (the game engine was never meant for multiplayer)-creation club with paid "mods" as the only modding allowed (to get all that sweet micro transaction money).